ArticleCytotherapy2024
Ex vivo culture resting time impacts transplantation outcomes of genome-edited human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in xenograft mouse models.
Article in Cytotherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delivery Systems for Therapeutic Genome Editing: Challenges, Innovations, and Future Perspectives.MedComm · 2026Review
- Engraftment Outcome of CRISPR/Cas9-Edited Hematopoietic Stem Cells for Genetic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Evidence.Journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of CRISPR-Cas9, lentiviral transduction, and base editing for sickle cell disease in a murine model.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Bedside manufacturing of engineered stem cells using gene therapy foam.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2025Article
- Comparison of Gene-Editing Approaches for Severe Congenital Neutropenia-Causing Mutations in theThe CRISPR journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Ex vivo resting culture is a standard procedure following genome editing in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs). However, prolonged culture may critically affect cell viability and stem cell function. We investigated whether varying durations of culture resting times impact the engraftment efficiency of human CD34+ HSPCs edited at the BCL11A enhancer, a key regulator in the expression of fetal hemoglobin. We employed electroporation to introduce CRISPR-Cas9 components for BCL11A enhancer editing and compared outcomes with nonelectroporated (NEP) and electroporated-only (EP) control groups. Post-electroporation, we monitored cell viability, death rates, and the frequency of enriched hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) fractions (CD34+CD90+CD45RA- cells) over a 48-hour period. Our findings reveal that while the NEP group showed an increase in cell numbers 24 hours post-electroporation, both EP and BCL11A-edited groups experienced significant cell loss. Although CD34+ cell frequency remained high in all groups for up to 48 hours post-electroporation, the frequency of the HSC-enriched fraction was significantly lower in the EP and edited groups compared to the NEP group. In NBSGW xenograft mouse models, both conditioned with busulfan and nonconditioned, we found that immediate transplantation post-electroporation led to enhanced engraftment without compromising editing efficiency. Human glycophorin A+ (GPA+) red blood cells (RBCs) sorted from bone marrow of all BCL11A edited mice exhibited similar levels of γ-globin expression, regardless of infusion time. Our findings underscore the critical importance of optimizing the culture duration between genome editing and transplantation. Minimizing this interval may significantly enhance engraftment success and minimize cell loss without compromising editing efficiency. These insights offer a pathway to improve the success rates of genome editing in HSPCs, particularly for conditions like sickle cell disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.